I original found your content on TikTok a few months ago, and you have helped me so much in terms of masculinity and politics in this small amount of time. I turned 18 last year, so this will be the first election I am able to vote it, and your insight has helped me answer question and concerns that even my government teacher couldn't answer fully. Thank You!
I just turned 21 this year… so this is my first time being able to vote and i’ve been overwhelmed with online opinions, the state of the world and just information in general. Thank you for this video
This *deeply* resonated, and put into clear words what I’ve been struggling with this (and previous) election cycles, where I get incredibly upset and hurt by friends I otherwise love and admire for cheering on the Democratic ticket like they’re some symbol of hope who is above all criticism. One thing that I (maybe naively) think is worth mentioning is that voting third party in a deeply blue state is not the same as voting third party in a swing state. I will vote third party in Oregon so that, regardless of the outcome, my vote will not be part of the popular vote that Democrats like to point to as proof that their policies are what most Americans want.
Washington State voter here, I feel the same way. The electoral votes here are all going blue, and giving third parties more of the popular vote gives them more funding and a bigger platform to pull the conversation back to the left.
Also came here to say this. Either way, I think down ballot conversation especially focused on ranked choice is the far more important focus in Oregon this year.
This video has opened my eyes and helped me realize the change i want to bring to the world, I'm only 18 but i really want to learn and understand politics so i can help other young adults understand politics too. I'm definitely going to share this video, re-watch it, and refer to it many times in order to internalize its message and help me take action in my own communities. Thank you Mr. Coyote for helping me see things from a different perspective :)
You *have* to watch the whole video. I have to admit. I had my 3rd ever panic attack halfway through this video and had to stop. But getting through to the end of it gave me some hope and an idea of what I can actually do to help. I often avoid videos that run more than half an hour, but I gotta admit. Sometimes you need a whole hour to actually say something.
Halfway through right now and had to pause, because I am absolutely about to cry in both despair for the state of things and gratitude that someone else sees it too.
I can't overstate how much your content is adjusting my thought-patterns and behavior. You, sir are a genious. I know you stand on the shoulders of giants, but your eloquence is what makes me listen and understand. Thank you, for the most important 59minutes and 50 seconds of my life.
In the past five years I think I’ve quickly gone from 1st scale conservative to 4th scale socialist. This will be my first election and honestly it’s been killing me, but I’m a little more at peace with it now. This video also made me want to try talking to my conservative family members again. It’s been very hard to talk to them for many years now, but I wanna try. Thank you for that.
Great video! The only thing I’d say about acceleration voting for Stein rather than Trump is that it makes it more clear as to why that subset didn’t vote for Kamala
parts of this were really difficult and emotional to hear and process. I’m grateful you shared this perspective and I’ll be mulling it over very thoughtfully as election day approaches
I find myself ideologically in the 4th scale, and I will most likely vote for Kamala as harm reduction. I understand and want to participate in methods of creating meaningful change. I feel as though I fall into that group of people who may not actually do so after the election. For me however, it’s not because I don’t want to or feel as if there’s no point. Something I’ve always felt ashamed of is not being able to participate due to my disabilities, and when I heard you say that you held no respect for those who say one thing but don’t actually put those words into action, it made me think about where that puts me. I have a feeling I might know how you feel concerning the intersectionality of disability and taking action outside of performative justice, but it’s something I haven’t been able to come to terms with myself.
There are other ways to make meaningful change without going to protests or picketing or things like that. Just sharing thoughts and videos like these with your friends and family is a great start, especially if you’re on different scales and/or places in the political spectrum :)
"The doom and gloom baritone" is why I follow you. LOL I love Madelyne (sp), but your perspectives feel very grounded and rooted in reality. She is great for edutainment, you are great for the hard conversations. Also, thank you for this. As an Arab amerikan, I have fought with what to do and this perspective has given me hope. On another note, if you teach classes on talking to these "other scales", I'd love the details because I need to learn how to do that. LASTLY, can you do a video that talks more about our "engagement in the system" that you talked about around the 39-minute mark? Thanks!
Acceleration is also an ecological factor. The habitat is collapsing. Billionaires drink water. Breath air. Need space to live. That’s all falling apart. Right now.
Chiming in as your Canadian neighbour (I’m in New-Brunswick). I find this very interesting considering we have elections in New-Brunswick today! We face the same issues, though both our conservative and “liberal” parties are not quite as far right yet as the republicans and democrats are. I voted third party, because I know my constituency is an easy win for the liberals and that a vote for the Green Party can help them in the long run. I consider myself at a 3.5 on the scale of political consciousness, as I’m aware of the grander scale issues yet not entirely ready to bring the whole system down. I go to protest and I boycott companies, but as an autistic person change on that big of a scale terrify me, especially considering how we don’t have basics in place to rebuild it better after it would fall. I’ll just finish up with a little citation from 1984: "If there is hope, it lies with the proles”
This video is crazy. . . Packed full of educational & thought provoking information. To think that I've been using fourth scale thinking since childhood sounds ridiculous to me, but frankly on reflection it perfectly explains why as a kid, (before learning about these ideologies) I developed/invented personally, ideological thinking that I only realised in 2020-21 is similar if not the same as socialist, anarchist & communist ideas. There is so much more to be said about everything. But I think I'll leave it here; it may seem small, but that's a massively big self realisation & self reassurance for me in the face of constant world doubt & trauma induced doubt in myself. My ideals are my own, are focused not for myself, created by the innocent mind of a child, but reinforced by education & wisdom through age, I will never abandon my childhood ideals bcos they have always been the ideals I'll turn to dust with.
I think this is a moving scale…and we are all of the four levels…at different times. I can identify with each space…at different times. I guess in this moment…looking from the tree top view…the question is…how do we move doing the least harm…and when we get there…based on that decision…what project do we take on…rolling up the sleeves…making a plan for the long haul? For me…the importance of and the education of that role comes from the learning of the third parties. The third parties are the teachers…the curriculum through witch we make the more permanent new way forward. Over this last year….starting out on level 3 as a liberal…(where I’ve probably been for most of my political life) through Gaza…I see the work is centered in community. And the wheels of movement are through activism, paying careful attention, building and strengthening unions, mutual aid…with an emphasis on collective liberation. I get it. I see it. I live in Maine and am so grateful for rank choice voting. It would be painful to put Kamala first. But in another state…I would do it. People are in real life struggle…and to make it even harder for them…I would lose sleep. I appreciate your content and your points. They are always well thought out.
Thank you 💚 I came here to find this because the TikTok version was too cut-down to be fully comprehensible. I'm particularly interested in the opportunity to engage with conservatives in the fourth scale. I wonder if using our framing of the system as "capitalism" provides a barrier to that engagement? Is there language we can use which is more inclusive?
Absolutely. That's a question about pedagogy. With pretty much anyone other than fourth-scale leftists, I would never come out the gate condemning capitalism, that would set the whole conversation up for failure. I find a lot of conservatives I know resonate with the phrase "the system," and a lot of liberals resonate with emphasis on the military industrial complex and corporations. Both of which are just facets of this capitalist system, but it creates gentler inroads.
I appreciate your input to the collective discussion, even if I don’t necessarily agree with everything you said. One slight but not unimpactful potential disagreement is, and Chomsky said this (at least in 2016; maybe he’s tweaked it since), is the impact you mention of 3rd party voting only applies to swing states and states that might be borderline swing states. But overall I appreciate your informed nuance.
Although I fundamentally disagree with some of the points stated I greatly appreciated how respectful and well thought through those points were! Great video!!!
My brother and I are thinking of voting third party. But I don't think we're accelerationists. We've previously considered the accelerationist position, voting for trump, cuz f*** it. But we're voting third party, rather, on the expectation that the system will endure, as opposed to breaking down. See, we're hoping that we can signal to mainstream parties (see the democrats) that we detest this right-wing swing by embracing the spoiler effect and voting for someone more left than they are. Then, maybe, democrats will work to try and recapture this voting block by appealing to our sensibilities... right? That's the theory anyways. It's the only way we can see of trying to advance our interests in the present electoral system. Different from damage control certainly. Optimistic? Perhaps. But we're tired of being coerced into voting for someone we hate every year.
Yeah, if you believe that the Democrats can be fundamentally moved away from the positions that their corporate funders pay them to hold, and believe that the system as a whole can be salvaged, and the environment, economy, and our communities can all survive another Trump presidency without taking levels of damage that you conscience can't bear, then that makes sense. But it's worth making sure you actually believe each of those things, because if any one of them doesn't feel true to you, then voting third party starts to look a lot less ethical.
Thank you as I came here to say the same thing. It is the only way I know how to help swing the pendulum back the other way. Whether by Dems of an actual 3rd person.
@@WatchfulCoyoteBiden approved almost double the oil drilling of Trump. The capitalist options are like options given to a child. The capitalist/parent is happy with which ever choice.
You said you are standing on the shoulders of giants, so I assume you've done some reading on this topic. Could you provide some reading sources on this topic? Thanks.
This resonated with me deeply, and the four scales expressed here create a useful heuristic device for determining how to engage with friends and family on the "other" political side. This heuristic is also very useful for determining the value of "true" statements expressed about any given political issue. That said, I find your characterization of third party voters as accelerationists incomplete and (perhaps) unkind, in this election cycle especially. By your own admission, you live in a state which has instituted ranked choice voting. This allows you to vote your conscience without having to directly grapple with the iterated Prisoner's Dilemma that the two party system creates for the rest of the country. In a similar vein, I live in such a deep blue state that Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to win, releasing me to vote my own conscience in safety. Both you and I are in a privileged position whereupon we can safely vote for a candidate which aligns with our actual values, without any fear that we will inadvertently bring about the worst of all possible worlds by doing so. To your credit, you acknowledge this privilege openly, but I fear that your conclusions are colored by it nonetheless. When considering, by contrast, the plight of Palestinian and Muslim voters in Michigan, I cannot bring myself to sit in judgment of their refusal to vote for the woman who is actively enabling the genocide of their people, perhaps even their friends and family, either as an "accelerationist" position or just a poor strategic choice. Similarly, I will not sit in judgment of those who, correctly, observe that the Democratic Party has lurched so far to the right over the past few election cycles precisely because they know that they define the leftward boundary of American politics for all practical purposes. A strong showing by an actually left-leaning third party, especially in swing states, might open up a new leftward flank with which the Democrats are forced to contend. The birth of the Republican Party arose under similar circumstances, and managed to supplant the Whigs that had preceded them. That said, I completely understand a vote for Kamala Harris as a tactical, anti-fascist vote. My fear is that, given your own acknowledgment that the most powerful folks in the world are operating at either the first (naked self-interest) or the fourth (ideological commitment to a global vision of their choosing) scale of political thought (I might further observe that the the first and fourth scales of political thought manage to form a perfect circle from this vantage point), and further given that Kamala Harris has shown herself to have a lockstep commitment to the interests of those folks, a Harris administration may very well have no meaningful distinction from another Trump administration, apart from the rhetoric that accompanies the policy.
I really like this framework and for the most part I agree with your logic, particularly that in this broken system we sometimes have to separate our voting choices from what we actually support (and that you shouldn't be holding your nose, but moving onto the real work), and that the choice should be based on what produces the best (or least worst?) real outcome. Following that logic though, voting for Harris from my position in a winner-take-all red state feels like even more of a performative failure than voting third party.
The one thing that keeps nagging at me is this. If the Green Party obtains more ballot access and federal funding for campaigns by passing the 5% national vote threshold, would it not be the most strategic to vote green in a very solidly blue state like WA? Considering the electoral college determines the outcome, would a couple million popular votes going going green from CA, WA, NY, MA and other strong blue states be an ideal outcome without swaying the election to Trump? I feel like this is something that could be specified, but I haven’t really seen it discussed. Or this could apply to weaker red states to sway more blue, as I know at least some republicans would vote green, possibly more likely in solid blue states as well. Does it require too much organization or risk to overall election results? Or is it too reliant on working within the system for change rather than divesting from it? I can’t come to a solid conclusion. I am not an accelerationist, nor do I want to endanger the most vulnerable populations with my vote, but considering i live in a verrry blue state (WA) it also doesn’t feel like that qualifies. Just not sure what to make of these details
Isn’t “ranked choice voting” an example of reform, working within the system? What about overturning Citizens United, enforcing ethics rules for SCOTUS, carbon credits for individuals (not just corporations)?
34:08 You say, "...be honest with yourself. If you're actually an accelerationist who is willing to trade the lives of the most marginalized people in the world for a chance that the horrors they suffer will awaken the masses and lead to a large enough movement to create meaningful change, own that." But that's not what I believe voting third party will do. You are projecting YOUR beliefs on third party voter's intentions. You've ignored the statement of the video you included in the related TikTok in which the green party outlines their goals, which aren't even about getting the white house this election cycle. It's disingenuous to ignore their self professed goals. I'm surprised you fell into this trap of assuming third party voters couldn't have genuine (if perhaps delusional) hope that their votes might change the political landscape; for instance, Kamala wins, but it's a close call and the Green Party gets 5% of the vote and federal funding, and the demands are taken more seriously because of a big turnout and recognition of the uncommitted movement's political power. Additionally, how is the consequence of Accelerationism any different than complicit Liberalism (aka reluctant Kamala voters)? Genuine question. Aren't the most disenfranchised and vulnerable harmed in both cases? In an Accelerationist view, wouldn't war or rebellion actually present opportunities for disenfranchised to rise in a reorganization of power? Doesn't voting for Kamala actually prioritize stability and status quo, which keeps the disenfranchised and vulnerable in their existing states? Later 37:25 you say "that's not our fault" regarding environmental catastrophe and then say 37:52 that third party voting is "excuse oneself from the responsibility of action that we all have". So which is it? Your logic is contradictory. Do we have collective responsibility or don't we? If you're a liberal prioritizing your own comfort, own it. You're doing the same condescension you pretend to oppose and honestly I thought I agreed with you until I realized you were just rationalizing voting for a war criminal (just another Tuesday, right?). There is nuance to this but this stream of consciousness thought has many contradictory statements and doesn't actually discuss the goals of third party voters and the uncommitted movement.
Beautiful questions. I don't have the space to address all of them, but one thing I'll mention is this: There's a meaningful difference between fault and responsibility. It seems like you're using or thinking of them interchangeably, and that's dangerous, in relationships and politics. So when I say: "that's not our fault," that statement is not antithetical to it being our responsibility. Also, it's not support to allow people to walk into traps. In the same way, if I'm acting in a way that has consequences that it seems like I can't see, it's not an act of friendship to say nothing. That's just conflict avoidance. So when I point out that voting third-party is accelerationist, I'm not talking about the motivations for it- I'm speaking about the effects. I framed it the way I did because if someone tells me that I'm walking into a trap, and I still choose to do it, then I'm at least acting with full awareness of the harm I'm about to suffer, regardless of what my initial motivations for choosing that path were. Pointing out the trap isn't questioning my motivations, it's illuminating effects. If, knowing the effects of third party voting amount to accellerationism, you still choose to act that way- then you're choosing an accellerationist path, honestly. I'm not trying to judge that- I have close friends who are accellerationsts. But I will explain why it's not my choice, because I'm trying to make sure everyone's eyes are open. Hope that sheds a little light on my position.
RE: A Latino man running Proud Boys. Latino does not mean "not white". You can be from a Latin American country and have Spanish, or other European ancestry. I live in Texas, where we use "Hispanic" as a check box for "race" on forms. There's a box for "Hispanic" and a box for "White Hispanic"--because both identities exist. Here's a video of his mother speaking out in a statement--just for reference. I know zero about her racial identity, but she looks like any other blonde white woman you'd see at the mall. Regardless of what her roots are, just looking at her, and hearing her speak--she would be served all the same white privilege of any other white woman on any given day. th-cam.com/video/7lxKh5asy0M/w-d-xo.html
I think there is some genuine merit in voting third party in deep blue states. The electoral votes for WA state are going all blue, and were a long ways from that changing. I feel there is validity in getting more funding to go toward third parties via increasing popular vote, when that individual vote will reliably not change the electoral vote count. And as we both seem to understand, the third oarty does serve a purpose in effecting the natuonal conversation and shifting demands. Third party platforms could also open more people up to higher levels of political thinking. If i were in a swing state, i would individually be 100% in line with what you say, but as a voter in a deep blue state, I differ individually.
WA voter here, too. I maintain that both red voters and blue voters who want to vote third party have just as much power here. It's nowhere close to a swing state, and the state will go blue, so our votes don't matter here... in that race. Thankfully, there are a good deal of other races and initiatives that our votes can actually have an impact in. That is to say, however little voting goes to effect change. There is SO much more that needs doing outside of the ballot box (or in our case, the mail-in ballot).
I feel like accelerationism is rarely a position I've seen backed by people who are underprivileged in our system. The only died in the wool accelerationist (who voted for trump in 2016) I've ever met is an Iranian guy born in the US who can live at home with his dad in LA rent free and is extremely stingy but has enough money to fuel a very expensive drug habit and who constantly takes advantage of the people around him. And he says he wants to have trump burn it all down so he can go pick up a rifle and go fight all the people he hates. And that always leaves a bad taste in my mouth because 1) he's not fighting anyone now other than people in his community who care about him and 2) he doesn't really spend the rest of his time building the capacity to fight in a revolutionary war; he spends it getting high and playing video games. And in my experience, all the politically active folks from marginalized communities tell me how bad the boot of the empire is and they're happy that someone who looks like someone who would wear the empire's boots listens and validates them and wants to do what he can to help get rid of the boot. And they do more political action in a week than the accelerationist does in 4 years. So I'm really not prepared to trade those people on a roll of the dice that more people will get radicalized when things get really bad especially when radicalization can look like that accelerationist. People who think that all of America's problems can be solved with a cartridge box so long as it gets bad enough that everyone picks it up and it becomes socially acceptable to murder and wound others in the name of the world you want. And all it makes me wonder is: have you tried anything before the last resort? Cuz with my accelerationist I can say for certain he hasn't. Unless playing apex legends and getting high is considered radical political action, he absolutely hasn't. And it makes me wonder what accelerationists have tried to get them to their conclusion.
Yeah, I often experience accellerationism as pretty self-excusing. That said, like most political ideologies, you can find very different expressions of it. A few of the most hardcore marxists I know are acccellerationists, and they're not like the gentleman you know at all- they're deeply politically active in their communities in healthy ways. Doesn't make them right or wrong, but there are different flavors. That said, I obviously agree with you, I don't think it's a good tactic.
When considering the fourth level of consciousness - Is there going to be value in conservative policy makers engaging former democratic participants like Tulsi Gabbard and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.....or even in my mind someone like Bernie Saunders - all who could make significant impact on policy changes that challenge the millitary industrial complex - Gabbard, Big Pharma - Kennedy, and Corporate greed - many forms - Saunders. I consider these options more significant and possible advantageous for citizens to get behind. There are parts of this that are worth discussing.....not just painting with one broad failing brush.
What is your take on the uncommitted movement and saying you won't vote for a candidate for x,y,z reason? Our democratic system is extremely undemocratic but something like that has the ability to twist the arm of a candidate to hear out their constituents. Or is thinking like that just lending more credence to our system than it deserves?
I used to consider myself a liberal but after Obama I simply can't look at the system the same way. His whole campaign ran on the notion of change and nothing really did. I don't want to vote for Harris, but I agree that a 2nd Trump presidency would hurt people I know and love. I'm still trying to find a way to help my community, any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
I found this incredibly insightful but have a bit of a thought experiment to consider relating to the point of voting third party. Imagine a couple that are both at the fourth level of political consciousness. They've examined their voting options but conclude two different ways. One's an accelorationist and will vote Trump whilst the other takes your stance and will vote Harris unhappily. However, both are sentimental to third party candidates like De La Cruz. If they vote in opposition to each other, they'll have 'cancelled their votes out' and been as functional as a non-voter. Yet, if they'd both voted third party, although they'd not have made a significant stride towards either accelorationism or harm-reduction, they'll still have made a more than meaningless contribution towards change in the right direction. I think this kind of thought experiment could mean two things. Either accelorationism and harm-reduction being at odds with one another means that one strategy is much worse than another, and there needs to be more advocating against one or the other; or that voting third party is still viable in some capacity if ultimately either way we're heading in the wrong direction. Even if this is still an accelorationist idea, would it not make more sense to bring into peoples consciousness the idea of third party options by increading their voter block? An accelorationist wants things to get worse so they can get better later, so why not sow the seeds now instead of later? You understandably have a bias towards harm reduction, which is good as I too do, but I don't think that accelorationism needs to end with voting for Trump out of spite or the need to prove ones own point. Voting third party in this instance achieves the same outcome but has better long term implications.
@@Danilixo10 so all of this is a conversation about what many call Theories of Change. One way to think about this is just Strategy. Many strategies counteract one another, or if not totally counteract, then at least pull in different enough directions that they render each other much less effective than they would be otherwise. This is why the central organizing tenet for many people who consider such things is Solidarity. Don’t cross picket lines is a good example of this. This is why Unions are so central to meaningful change- they’re a context for everyone to get on the same page about strategy, Theories of Change, and pull in the same direction efficiently.
I would love a guide, even if it needs to be reductive and simplified, on how we can enact actual change in a system where voting’s not really a productive option. I understand concepts like community building and organizing but it’s so hard to know where to start and how to know if you’re actually on the right path. I can actively see how austerity and privatization is corroding the safety nets my community used to have and it makes me feel so incredibly powerless. I try to help out in my community. I could to more but it’s a start. But that doesn’t change the fact that my country is sponsoring heinous acts around the world in order to line the pockets of the ruling class.
Re: where to start in organizing > I’ve joined lots of different groups over the years. I finally exited the liberal purgatory phase when I began associating with groups that were actively anti-colonial/anti-imperialist. This might look like: Land Back, Free Palestine, or local mutual aid groups focused on housing, substance harm reduction, etc. Hope this gives you a jumping off point. I know rallies don’t always feel productive, but they’re a great way to meet likeminded folks if you’re attending specific ones.
I feel like I still get lost trying to reach conservatives I know through anti corporate conversation as many of them seem to always find their way back to 'trickle down' and a need for big business and rich people otherwise 'who would give poor people jobs and pay them'. Then it always gets detailed to other issues...
Not sure if you bring this up later (i am 40 min in) but i feel like local elections are completely overlooked in the Discourse (tm). I am German so maybe this is just not as big a deal in America, and as an inhabitant of earth the presidential election is important to me, but i think the material conditions of USians can be much improved with local elections. States rights is a dog whistle yes, but couldn't that also be used for good? If you can't stomach voting for Kamala, which I whole heartedly understand (voting in Germany next year, knowing that basically all parties are pro is not real is going to be very similar), focus on your local politics. And yes that's still within the system and not nearly enough (the Chomsky paraphrase also applies to local government) but it will make a difference, materially. I was organised in a local chapter of the left party in my state as a teen and you very quickly realize how many of the folks in politics are just people. People you can talk to. And this doesn't replace systemic change, but it can give other people the mental capacity to become active too. People speak fondly of the programs that helped them in times of need, of mutual aid groups that made a difference. One of my issues with accelerationism is that it robs everyone most affected of the agency to inform themselves and become active. If i am working 2 jobs, still not making ends meet, in debt, homeless that's not really the time to read theory for a lot of people. Some people do, some people go to prison and get educated, but I am guessing this is not the norm. And if the situation gets so dire no one has the energy to think until every thing collapses we would all need burnout retreats before we can rebuild. And that's not feasible in my opinion
Countrywide all votes for Stein will count towards the 5% threshold for permanent ballot status, saving months of work and expense, and providing multimillion dollar public funding
can u recommend a few good books for each level of consciousness and a few just good ones that just help understand all of this i would much appreciate that. i prefer as large a list as u can muster but again ill appreciate any help. thank you
You spoke to the intersectionality of patriarchy, capitalism, white supremacy, etc., and make the point that these are all actually the same thing. I have begun referring to this ‘thing’ as dominator culture, a term coined by Riane Eisler and expounded upon by bell hooks. By defining the concept my hope is that it gives people a tangible term to search and explore. However, the results of an internet search of this term are dominated by Terrence McKenna’s more extreme mysticism, which, in my experience, tends to deter people from wanting to go deeper. Is there a term that you use, and/or do you think there is value in advocating for the use of the term dominator culture to name that intersectionality?
@@stevenbilzing5250 I don’t know. This is something that I saw hooks struggle with as well, because names matter, and it’s hard. She often just named many facets, like: “Capitalist patriarchal white supremacy.” Precise, but clunky, as she obviously knew. When I track it, it feels like the common denominator is dehumanization. It’s the dehumanization that leads to the exploitation, the domination, etc. But that’s a long compound word that doesn’t translate well to a name, like “dehumanizing culture” isn’t catchy, doesn’t roll off the tongue. So I don’t know.
This is exactly the information I needed to hear. Ive been struggling so much with the idea of voting for Kamala. I believe I was going down the path of accelerationism and I have much to think about still. What do you think of the strategy of outwardly telling your friends/family (who are level 1-3) that you will not be voting for her (and the reasons why) even if you are? Does that accomplish anything?
I think myth and story are among the most powerful tools for shaping societies. The problem is that the Pentagon already knows that, this is why they have the unholy alliance they do with hollywood. So I think the problem is that hollywood is SUCH an amazing medium to create change, and it's already been hijacked and is currently in complete service to the system that we need to change. That's not an argument against writing liberatory stories- we need those desperately. We need counterpoints to the overwhelming sea of propaganda that is shoved down our throats daily, dressed as crime dramas and superhero films. Just pointing out that it's an uphill battle, we're not starting from neutral ground around mythology.
A respectfully conveyed and unique perspective. Thank you for the opportunity to challenge and refine my own views. If you have any sources for the Diddy/Epstein/Trump connection I’d appreciate them for my own research. Thanks!
I love this framework! I do have a contention with your view of Trumps current position, however. With people like RFK, Vivek, Tulsi, Tucker etc. surrounding Trump this time, and the fact that many more people have woken up to the corporate capture of our government - can you admit that he is much better equipped to actually be the anti-establishment candidate this time around? The fact that he has admitted fault in many of the people he surrounded himself with during his presidency, shows that he may be self aware and ready to do it better this time. (I fully acknowledge that this proposition goes against his inherent selfish and hard headed character. Lol, but it’s still possible)
When considering questions that I already have an opinion on, I sometimes find it helpful to put it in a wholly different context that I have the opposite opinion about. Like imagine that Biden hadn't dropped out, but had made some cabinet changes. Then imagine someone saying: "Don't you think he's much better equipped to stand up for the people of the United States now?" How would you respond?
@@WatchfulCoyote I can appreciate the exercise. It makes me see my possible bias on both sides when thinking about it that way. When it comes to Biden, it would take a huge paradigm shift on his behalf and VERY different cabinet appointees, for me to believe any real “4th level of thinking” changes would come from that. I know there are people who think that exact same thing about Trump, so how do we reconcile that? Can both viewpoints be true? For me the difference is that Trump has started to surround himself with people who are openly calling out the uniparty corruption and structural issues in our government, while Biden has been a part of that problem for most of his political career.
I also want to admit that my largest apprehension that's holding me back from taking RFK's endorsement to heart and actually voting for Trump, is the fear that Trump won't actually be the anti-establishment candidate that's he's setting himself up to be. I am very aware that in large part, this is what happened during his first time in office and could very well happen again.
Hi I'm not sure if you respond or not but I had some takeaways from the video that I wanted to engage in a dialogue about. One of the things mentioned is Chomsky's picking against an objectively evil candidate as a break from the work we need to be doing didn't resonate too much with me. By how you've explained things in the video, doesn't the "break vote" even as a revolutionary circle back to the third scale voting practice of maintaining stability for the time being? Some other things I thought of was the break from your work as you phrased it. From what I've seen of you (tiktok and youtube) you seem to be doing exceptional work in guiding people towards the cause while also trying to instill values of healthy masculinity to the youth. Unfortunately the leftist movement in the states is still almost non existent and even in the spaces that do exist there's so much infighting its hard to see the work of those spaces as meaningful other than platforming our collective anti-capitalist stance. So most of the time, your strategy of vote for the lesser evil and then keep the work up until the evil doesn't have the means to oppress doesn't really apply to well here because the actual work is being done by a fairly small group of individuals like yourself while enabling third scale voters to think they're voting on a fourth scale understanding without taking on the moral responsibility it comes with voting for an objectively evil candidate like Kamala, even if she's apparently just a little less evil than Trump. My primary concern being the complacency that comes with voting for liberal governments. As you mentioned on your tiktok, voting blue did absolutely nothing this term in terms of things like Roe V. Wade, the genocide of the Palestinian people, government approved anti-union crackdowns, etc. A liberal government creates a far more complacent population than a conservative government does. Another factor to consider in my opinion is also how comfortable the republicans have gotten to severely contradictory positions and statements. Kamala is very clear on her support for the Israeli occupation. So is Trump, but him and his party are currently perceived as more Pro-Palestine than the democrats by non fourth scale voters (especially in Arab and Muslim communities) because the genocide started and perpetuated under DNC leadership and American conservatives will excuse Trump for anything. I personally do not think the right wing is organized enough to establish a fascist government outright in one term but another blue term will solidify this stance of the general populace who might not be super informed. I am hyper fixating on the genocide because I feel like regardless of its horrors, it disillusioned a good chunk of liberals. If the Trump administration takes over and continues it (which I am sure they will), it will work to disillusion conservative POC voters at the minimum. Conservative sentiments are at an all time high in older brown (Arab, South Asian, Latin) communities because their goldfish memory makes them think the only things that are bombing people that look like them are Netanyahu and Biden, not Zionism, Imperialism and Capitalism. I guess I am an accelerationist this election because I think the general public in the US need to be disillusioned urgently. They need to learn that instead of saying both sides and calling it a day, they have to recognize the underlying oppression that comes default with capitalism and the both parties in the US represent the same things, corporate interest and capitalism. This would not come with another blue term. I live in Canada so I am a direct witness on what North American liberalism does. It never protects the vulnerable but successfully moves the general sentiment towards conservatism. So, trying to protect the most vulnerable in the society by voting lesser evil has worsened the conditions of the most vulnerable to the point of no return. Homeless people would still be homeless under Kamala and that is definitely not protecting the most vulnerable at the slightest. Sure Trump might put them in a camp or worse but the problem with liberal governments is since things stay the same people forget how horrible this "same" is. Vulnerable families are victims of food insecurity, lack of access to healthcare and so much more and even though we have almost normalized how these words affect us, these are absolutely horrible things happening to our fellow human beings RIGHT NOW. Which vulnerable community will be better off under blue? Not homeless people, not marginal communities (LGBTQ+, POC, etc.), not even women (Roe V. Wade). I am keeping this strictly local because the argument made for protecting the most vulnerable can never apply to the most vulnerable in other countries like again, Palestinians. They are already being erased from the planet under the "lesser evil". How would voting blue protect the most vulnerable people in the world or in US right now? I am not coming from a place of hostility and I absolutely hate leftist infighting but man I despise complacency. TLDR: I can't vote in the states but if I did, I would definitely vote for Trump, the "higher evil" and then dip my entire body in hand sanitizer for a week.
What a thoughtful and useful framework for understanding different political perspectives within my own little social group! Thank you for making this. I'm currently about 20 minutes in, and I would love to see citations about certain claims made in the video, if the creator or anyone in the comments can help me out: - Trump being involved in human trafficking (other than his association with Epstein, which I understand is more than enough evidence in many folks' minds). - Kamala being further to the right on corporate regulation and foreign policy than George W. Bush. Where is this coming from? The Bush era was globally and nationally transformative in those two areas. - Obama siccing dogs on indigenous people. I recall when this happened amid the Dakota Access pipeline protests, but I thought it was a private security agency. How was Obama involved? All I remember is him delaying the pipelines as a lame duck and Trump issuing the permits immediately on taking office.
The first one's easy, if I remember I'll put some resources together on the other two, but because the Kamala/Bush question is comparative, it requires more sourcing than I have time for at the moment. Hope this helps, though! www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/14/teen-models-powerful-men-when-donald-trump-hosted-look-of-the-year
That article is a bit outdated, but paints a picture. If you want the recent updates, this video is a very tidy summary that paints a much more accurate and up-to-date image of what he was doing and why. www.tiktok.com/t/ZTFPWeR1K/
I agree with a lot of what you said in your video and regardless I want to thank you for taking the time to make this video but I definitely disagree with some of the points made. First, I understand the mainstream accelerationist perspective but I could argue that it’s accelerationist to elect Harris so that society can see a woman of color commit all sorts of war crimes and atrocities to finally break from identity politics and the false premise of lesser evils and get to organizing. Second, to tell third party voters they’re all accelerationist is simply not true and telling them to vote for Trump instead is not even materially relevant to what countless third party voters are trying to build. You understand that Claudia De la Cruz is a good candidate and has a solid policy platform, voting for that, ESPECIALLY in solid blue states is what organized and strategic voting looks like and should have been talked about just how you referenced your ability to vote differently under ranked choice in Maine. Voter turnout for third party has real material benefits in highlighting popular policy positions, even going further to demand cabinet positions, at some point to get a third party that has leverage on a relevant scale we have to struggle in establishing that and isn’t only relevant when there’s a clear path to victory. Third, it sounds like a self serving western liberal perspective to romanticize and talk about a vote being qualitatively different if it comes the fourth level of consciousness for Kamala vs third level of consciousness for her, a vote is a vote. Obviously, I agree with the premise of moving past that to recognize that people on the fourth level recognize the importance of organizing to reclaim our soul and consciousness after voting Kamala. Last thing I want to mention is that for your references to adrienne marie brown and Stacy Abrams, they could have leveraged their voices for over a year to hold Kamala accountable but they did not. You made a comment saying, “Getting the empire to put up a pride flag instead of structurally opposing it, they’re actually supporting the empire”. adrienne maree brown is so deep into celebrity culture and worship of people like Beyoncé which to understand you know has to do with internalized white supremacy and capitalism. I believe they’re important individuals who have contributed a great deal but we can name countless radicals that disagree with how they’re showing up and relating to the fourth level of consciousness, put their bodies on the line for the collective. Thanks again for the video and I appreciate how you humanize people across the spectrum, since most of us are working class and have more in common than we think. Would love to hear what you think about my comments.
Great vid! Though i do want to point out to anyone watching that at 44:06 you can see the prime encapsulation of leftist thought which i believe is not directly & accurately articylated in the video. Rightly or wrongly, accusing the founders of plagiarizing haudenosaunee politics does the following: 1) aligns with the defeated and profiled-as inferior while aggrandizing their worth 2) assumes a value of capitalist society - intellectual property 3) accuses mainstream capitalist society of violating its own virtue 4) downplays, in this case leaves out, discussion of the victim-profiled group's own transgressions against the value held (intellectual property). It is a classic leftist logical pathway stemming from feelings of & sympathies for the weak, overcome, and defeated. A valid one bc human empathy (duh), but one with the tradeoff of often losing when it comes to material confrontation with the industrial systems. Something advocated against in the section on strategic thinking as a rebel group. Seriously, i love this video it is intelligently constructed, written, and i like the critiques of conservative, fascist, liberal, accelerationist, and leftist ideologies. I just noticed this as a super concise expression of a reiterated motif from lefty types. Keep up the good work 👍
I get the third three points, and especially the one about assuming the value of a capitalist society is a great critique, but I'm a little confused by what you mean of the first one, especially the phrase: "aggrandizing their worth." The Haudenosaunee Confederacy held for two millennia, it's arguably one of the single most successful human governance models in the entire history of our species, on par with the Roman Empire, except without all the internal inequity and violence. Given that, referring to it in a celebratory way feels accurate to me- but to you it seems aggrandizing? Or am I misinterpreting?
@WatchfulCoyote you're getting it, but a critical part is the 4th pt that in criticizing the mainstream society on grounds of some virtue, the absence or disrespect of that virtue in other societies is downplayed or omitted. That reveals something about the true motivations. For example, it's common among leftist types to allege (mostly correctly) that western society is for example patriarchal and has a blood & soil nationalism. Yet very uncommon is any highlighting of these virtues in groups who the lefty identifies with the problems of such as the current palestinian nationalist movement. In the case here w the haudenosaunee, you claim them to have lasted 2k yrs. I'll assume there's information to base that on, but AFAIK the general historical consensus is that it was formed by Hiawatha et al in the late 1400s. So here it seems to me like you've exaggerated the longevity of that confederacy in order to give it higher status than it has already rightfully earned by virtue of its principles & it being a successful multinational union. Since the criticism is very selectively leveled, it indicates that the critic doesn't so much have a problem with patriarchy/blood & soil nationalism/imperialism/environmental destruction/etc etc, rather they have a problem with who's doing it and hence want to highlight apparent hypocrisies. Looping into a broader point with this is that while the thinking takes the form of a left wing attack, it is a kind of conservative argument at its core since it presents an idealized image of the past that the implicitly degenerate present has deviated from. And this imo fails for the same most conservative thinking does: it is the way it is bc of the way it was, so making things more the way they were brings us back to where we are.
This framework is very insightful and obviously well studied. I’m considering sending this to my very conservative family members to give them a new perspective. However, I am caught up on the voting for Kamala as the “break” and going back and doing the work of destroying the systems that uphold her. I have seen Palestinians in deep deep distress over the prospect of Americans voting for Kamala, their genocider. They will be one of the marginalized communities that will be thrown under the bus under a Harris administration, if we’re voting against accelerationism. I firmly believe that Palestinian resistance and the fall of Israel will be a major liberatory catalyst to free us all, for many reasons, but mostly given the connection between US empire and Israel. So how do you rectify that? I’m not sure I can step over all the bodies of Palestinians, who right now are actively being harmed, on my way to vote for Kamala. Would love any insights on this.
One must be able to vote third party, knowing there is no path to victory, believing that their vote sends a message to the adjacent party that they want it to change. Perhaps that effect is not worth the risk this election though
We are not sending our message to the system, but to reticent compatriots. We 💚💚💚want to break the uniparty and the empire. Red vs Blue differences are in rhetoric alone. Both are approved by the 1%er capitalists
I try to be bias towards free will, principles before profit, leaving it better than it was found, and serving others before yourself. I don't believe there are two or more parties. I believe people are given an illusion of choice between two evils. It's sad to see people overlook horrendous acts committed by their side just because they think the ends justify the means. Every voter is put in morally compromising positions every single election. My body, my choice is a concept of free will I support. Despite rhetoric, both sides want to make health and wellness decisions for you. Then they can write more bills. The system was designed to concentrate the authority of many in to the hands of a few. Our government, allegedly instituted for the well-being of all, has far surpassed the grievances noted in the Declaration of Independence. The Bill of Rights were amendments, after thoughts used as leverage. The delegates codefied slavery. The media presented Natives as barbarians so the Indian Removal act would be supported. Countless atrocities against innocent women and children carried out across multiple presidents and various political parties. For some reason, we keep casting votes of confidence for con artists. Lawyers who make up laws that keep lawyers in business. Ignorance of the law is no excuse yet it's incomprehensible to teach in public school. I think we need to reverse the flow of funding so it flows from the counties up. Individuals need more control over the decisions that impact our moral positions. We need the ability to hold public officials accountable. We need a cap on wealth so that currency continues flowing through the economy. Stockpiling is disruptive to free enterprise. No one should have enough resources to buy a politician or country. Our system may be the best on the planet, but the design is flawed. Self serving people are happy exploiting those flaws and towing the line to keep the system as it is. Any politician not talking about the expiration date of this empire is trying to maintain a corrupt system of control.
You lost me on Biden breaking the Railway Strike caused the East Palestine derailment. That derailment would have happened regardless of the outcome of the strike. I believe you know there are many things that cause events like this, and these many reasons normally point to a systems error and not a political decision. This oversimplification to justify your point seems out of place in a long form video.
@@neil5652 even in long form, there’s things I condense, and it’s tricky. Would you agree with the statement: “The rail workers strike was partially driven by the Union’s concern about degrading infrastructure and crashing safety standards.” ?
@@WatchfulCoyoteI can agree with that though I wouldn't say "Crashing" numerically railroads are safer than they have ever been. And your larger point I also agree with. The race to the bottom which the rail industry calls "Precision Schedule Railroading" is the heavier contribution to that derailment. I'd also say the USs reliance on trucks is directly pressuring railroads to act in this way.
He’s good. Really good, philosophically speaking. But ultimately, regarding how to move forward, he missed the boat big-time. It’s not just ranked-choice Maine residents who should vote 3rd party, it’s every person who values human rights and lives in a deep blue or deep red state. Maybe he doesn’t know that if/when a 3rd party reaches 5% of the popular vote, they will in the future have automatic ballot placement and federal funding and become viable. I don’t blame him, I just learned this political reality in 2024. We aren’t taught much bout how the system works in school and the two dominant parties actively suppress the information. Moral of the story, in any states other than swing-states (Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, Arizona, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Georgia, maybe a few others if you are determined to play it safe) voting for Kamala is fear-motivated, counter-productive, and wasteful. Vote Green. Help build a real movement for people & planet. The answer is to transform the system, not “totally tear it down” as he says a few times. That’s some 15 year-old anarchist wet dream nonsense. Antifa, yes. Green Party, also yes. ✅
While I have no training in it, I do like to keep an eye on history. In 1992, Perot won 19% of the popular vote. It did not break the duopoly. In fact, it seems to have achieved exactly noting, from where I sit. I, for one, try not to make the same mistake more than once. Or at least as few times as it takes me to see a pattern. To the other point, the idea that systems of power are eternal and beyond any attempt to tear down, I just like to look at the other empires of history. What changed them? Did Rome use third-party voting to escape the crushing grip of the emperors? Is there any, like literally *any* example of tyrannical empires changing in any way *other* than being torn down, one way or another? Even a cursory glance at history reveals the oft-repeated idea that empires can never be threatened, can never be torn down, as complete and utter nonsense. Once we see that, then it becomes clear that such a belief, rather than being the grounded and reality-based perspective that it's presented as, is a deeply internalized form of self-defeating, disempowering propaganda. No matter how many times people say things like: "That's some 15 year-old anarchist wet dream nonsense," history seems to think that it is the only way to topple systems of tyranny. When this is brought up, it's often met with a litany of details, like the fact that Rome spread it's self so thin, and the emergent inequity drove a civil unrest that created fertile ground for change. Somehow people manage to make these points while ignoring the glaring fact that the US empire is in *precisely* the same position today. It's breathtaking, really. Anyway, remember the words of Ursula LeGuin: "We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings."
You are very well written and thank you for your thoughts. They largely resonate with me, to a point, and I would love further discussion since my ballot sits waiting for marks. I think you oversimply the 4th level position of voting 3rd party. You collapse the choice of someone attempting to operate at the 4th level between accelerationism and activism, and thus demand that someone who does not vote Harris-Waltz "be honest enough" to vote Trump instead. Here, I think, you are incorrect. In my armature opinion, as a over-idealistic supporter of RCV and as a scientist, I take issue with any demand for strategic voting. Consider your statement that "refusing to vote" or a "protest vote" is ineffective, to the point that the system benefits from such action. This may be true (and may be not) but by the same logic is absolutely true of a strategic vote. Sadly though, as you have very well outlined, a voter operating from the 3rd and a voter operating from the 4th level who chooses to vote Democrat has become, from a statistical view, indistinguishable from each other. To me this is abhorrent, as future responses will be based on information from past actions, and if the only information we can discern from a vote is an implicit mandate to govern of the winner, we repeat the same cycles. A vote for a 3rd party or strategically withholding ones vote, need not explicitly be placing "the most marginalized in harms way on a gamble for a better world" but simply be a method of letting your sincere preference be recorded, and this information does have value. Despite what we espouse, this country's generally abysmal voter turnout and falling position in the word democracy index, are part of sincerely not voting for candidates who are entirely not ideologically aligned and sincerely voting for 3rd parties (and talking about them) is what gives RCV movements such strength. A rational 4th level non accelerationist may simply not vote for Harris and Waltz because that vote undermines their demand for a better democracy. I am truly jealous that you can express both support for your ideal candidate and not empower someone you dislike. So please do not disparage the choices of those with a less enlightened ballot. Hopefully someday before we die of heatstroke, extreme weather, or WW3 we might all be so lucky to have such choices.
Ranked choice voting, imho, a political reform but doesn’t address the problem of “the system.” Maybe FB marketplace and thrift store shopping is the easiest way for individuals to bring down the system. And becoming vegan😂
A lot of what you say is compelling, but I’m not convinced when you say I might as well vote for Trump to be honest with myself? Not compelling. This only makes me want to vote for neither even more.
I think saying there is any difference between Harris and Trump is like saying if a parent asks a child whether they want a red or blue shirt , that there is a difference. The capitalist options have both been approved by the 1%er capitalists.
im not an accelerationist. im not a politician or an activist. i am a noone. but i am a person and I'm not going to vote for a genocide. I'm sorry my ethical and intellectual capacity is so limited but I am at my limit.
Yes, watchful coyote admits that Harris and Trump are virtually the same policies with different rhetoric. But then says voting for Harris is harm reduction. Illogical.
You cite "research" that "all multi-millionaires are narcissistic and psychopaths," and this is provably false, regardless of what research you might be citing. In proof, I myself am a multimillionaire and am neither of those things. Nor are those who I associate with or choose to do business with. Be more careful with your rhetoric, please.
If anyone's curious, this Psychology Today article cites a dozen studies on this trend. www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/dangerous-ideas/201910/psychology-s-dark-triad-and-the-billionaire-class
You’re not a multimillionaire. They don’t have all the time in the world to complain on a random man’s TH-cam channel unless you won the lotto to get your money if you even have it as you claim😂
The is an interesting take. I mean this with respect. His point of view is clearly from a white privileged position. It doesn’t account for race and marginalized groups and how that impacts your consciousness. It doesn’t put any value in skin in the game. It’s easy to talk about sacrifice if you aren’t being sacrificed. You are saying how you have greater alignment with Jan 6 m, but as a Black person I see that but also see that they were actively trying to suppress votes of Blacks and if we overthrow corporate overlords they might still have issue with me.
I've come to associate appeals to skin in the game with arguments for capitalism (or at least for market-based economics), but other than that I see the same things in the interesting take above. His willingness to take "it's really CRONY capitalism you're against" conservatism at face value, as opposition to corporations, is hilarious.
Respectfully this is inconsistent and not particularly insightful. It comes off just as condescending as what you describe. By using your vote to support democrats, you are using your vote to support a genocide that would not be possible without the explicit or implicit approval of the American public. This is an American genocide rooted in American racism. Either the set of policies you vote for matters of it doesn’t. All this talk of levels of consciousness twisting yourself into a pretzel to justify voting to maintain a racist status quo that is clearly indefensible. I say this as someone who has enjoyed some of your content.
Came from TikTok, a vote for Stein is the only way to unravel this straight jacket of political woe. Harris won’t change, ergo I’m hoping Stein gets a say. You are finally seeing the reality that dividing the vote elects Trump. Everyone suffers. All we face is whether we protest Harris now or Trump later. That’s the choice before us. Own that.
It genuinely hurts how much it soothes my hurting heart to hear this said out loud. Thank you for being a voice of reason in the screaming world.
I original found your content on TikTok a few months ago, and you have helped me so much in terms of masculinity and politics in this small amount of time. I turned 18 last year, so this will be the first election I am able to vote it, and your insight has helped me answer question and concerns that even my government teacher couldn't answer fully. Thank You!
I just turned 21 this year… so this is my first time being able to vote and i’ve been overwhelmed with online opinions, the state of the world and just information in general. Thank you for this video
This *deeply* resonated, and put into clear words what I’ve been struggling with this (and previous) election cycles, where I get incredibly upset and hurt by friends I otherwise love and admire for cheering on the Democratic ticket like they’re some symbol of hope who is above all criticism.
One thing that I (maybe naively) think is worth mentioning is that voting third party in a deeply blue state is not the same as voting third party in a swing state. I will vote third party in Oregon so that, regardless of the outcome, my vote will not be part of the popular vote that Democrats like to point to as proof that their policies are what most Americans want.
Washington State voter here, I feel the same way. The electoral votes here are all going blue, and giving third parties more of the popular vote gives them more funding and a bigger platform to pull the conversation back to the left.
This!! I’m in Oregon too 🥲
Also came here to say this. Either way, I think down ballot conversation especially focused on ranked choice is the far more important focus in Oregon this year.
This video has opened my eyes and helped me realize the change i want to bring to the world, I'm only 18 but i really want to learn and understand politics so i can help other young adults understand politics too. I'm definitely going to share this video, re-watch it, and refer to it many times in order to internalize its message and help me take action in my own communities. Thank you Mr. Coyote for helping me see things from a different perspective :)
You *have* to watch the whole video.
I have to admit. I had my 3rd ever panic attack halfway through this video and had to stop. But getting through to the end of it gave me some hope and an idea of what I can actually do to help.
I often avoid videos that run more than half an hour, but I gotta admit. Sometimes you need a whole hour to actually say something.
Halfway through right now and had to pause, because I am absolutely about to cry in both despair for the state of things and gratitude that someone else sees it too.
I can't overstate how much your content is adjusting my thought-patterns and behavior. You, sir are a genious. I know you stand on the shoulders of giants, but your eloquence is what makes me listen and understand. Thank you, for the most important 59minutes and 50 seconds of my life.
genius*
In the past five years I think I’ve quickly gone from 1st scale conservative to 4th scale socialist. This will be my first election and honestly it’s been killing me, but I’m a little more at peace with it now. This video also made me want to try talking to my conservative family members again. It’s been very hard to talk to them for many years now, but I wanna try. Thank you for that.
Valuable and insightful commentary on how to actually bridge the gap
Great video! The only thing I’d say about acceleration voting for Stein rather than Trump is that it makes it more clear as to why that subset didn’t vote for Kamala
Great video. more people need to see this. Ranked choice voting FTW.
parts of this were really difficult and emotional to hear and process. I’m grateful you shared this perspective and I’ll be mulling it over very thoughtfully as election day approaches
Thank you! I am so happy I found this page (found you via TikTok)
I appreciate this video very much. Thank you for sharing and helping me put my feelings into context and perspective. 🙏🏼
I am learning so much. Thank you.
I'm glad I stuck out the video. I plan to try sharing it with a friend or associate or 2.
Also, it helps with perspective on myself and others I know.
I find myself ideologically in the 4th scale, and I will most likely vote for Kamala as harm reduction. I understand and want to participate in methods of creating meaningful change. I feel as though I fall into that group of people who may not actually do so after the election. For me however, it’s not because I don’t want to or feel as if there’s no point. Something I’ve always felt ashamed of is not being able to participate due to my disabilities, and when I heard you say that you held no respect for those who say one thing but don’t actually put those words into action, it made me think about where that puts me. I have a feeling I might know how you feel concerning the intersectionality of disability and taking action outside of performative justice, but it’s something I haven’t been able to come to terms with myself.
There are other ways to make meaningful change without going to protests or picketing or things like that. Just sharing thoughts and videos like these with your friends and family is a great start, especially if you’re on different scales and/or places in the political spectrum :)
"The doom and gloom baritone" is why I follow you. LOL I love Madelyne (sp), but your perspectives feel very grounded and rooted in reality. She is great for edutainment, you are great for the hard conversations. Also, thank you for this. As an Arab amerikan, I have fought with what to do and this perspective has given me hope. On another note, if you teach classes on talking to these "other scales", I'd love the details because I need to learn how to do that. LASTLY, can you do a video that talks more about our "engagement in the system" that you talked about around the 39-minute mark? Thanks!
I am very happy to find you on this platform.
Acceleration is also an ecological factor. The habitat is collapsing. Billionaires drink water. Breath air. Need space to live. That’s all falling apart. Right now.
Exactly
Thank you sir for your service to the effort. Your efforts to raise consciousness are of value, and I appreciate you.
Thank you for sharing this
A really smart video it’s given me a lot to think about and wrestle with.
Wow this brings a lot of insight and perspective to my personal journey through the scales. Thank you!
You've earned a new subscriber. Thank you for this video
Chiming in as your Canadian neighbour (I’m in New-Brunswick). I find this very interesting considering we have elections in New-Brunswick today! We face the same issues, though both our conservative and “liberal” parties are not quite as far right yet as the republicans and democrats are.
I voted third party, because I know my constituency is an easy win for the liberals and that a vote for the Green Party can help them in the long run.
I consider myself at a 3.5 on the scale of political consciousness, as I’m aware of the grander scale issues yet not entirely ready to bring the whole system down. I go to protest and I boycott companies, but as an autistic person change on that big of a scale terrify me, especially considering how we don’t have basics in place to rebuild it better after it would fall.
I’ll just finish up with a little citation from 1984:
"If there is hope, it lies with the proles”
This video is crazy. . . Packed full of educational & thought provoking information.
To think that I've been using fourth scale thinking since childhood sounds ridiculous to me, but frankly on reflection it perfectly explains why as a kid, (before learning about these ideologies) I developed/invented personally, ideological thinking that I only realised in 2020-21 is similar if not the same as socialist, anarchist & communist ideas.
There is so much more to be said about everything. But I think I'll leave it here; it may seem small, but that's a massively big self realisation & self reassurance for me in the face of constant world doubt & trauma induced doubt in myself.
My ideals are my own, are focused not for myself, created by the innocent mind of a child, but reinforced by education & wisdom through age, I will never abandon my childhood ideals bcos they have always been the ideals I'll turn to dust with.
I think this is a moving scale…and we are all of the four levels…at different times. I can identify with each space…at different times. I guess in this moment…looking from the tree top view…the question is…how do we move doing the least harm…and when we get there…based on that decision…what project do we take on…rolling up the sleeves…making a plan for the long haul? For me…the importance of and the education of that role comes from the learning of the third parties. The third parties are the teachers…the curriculum through witch we make the more permanent new way forward. Over this last year….starting out on level 3 as a liberal…(where I’ve probably been for most of my political life) through Gaza…I see the work is centered in community. And the wheels of movement are through activism, paying careful attention, building and strengthening unions, mutual aid…with an emphasis on collective liberation. I get it. I see it. I live in Maine and am so grateful for rank choice voting. It would be painful to put Kamala first. But in another state…I would do it. People are in real life struggle…and to make it even harder for them…I would lose sleep. I appreciate your content and your points. They are always well thought out.
this video is absolutely invaluable
Thanks for the chills beautiful human. Well said.
Thank you 💚 I came here to find this because the TikTok version was too cut-down to be fully comprehensible. I'm particularly interested in the opportunity to engage with conservatives in the fourth scale. I wonder if using our framing of the system as "capitalism" provides a barrier to that engagement? Is there language we can use which is more inclusive?
Absolutely. That's a question about pedagogy. With pretty much anyone other than fourth-scale leftists, I would never come out the gate condemning capitalism, that would set the whole conversation up for failure. I find a lot of conservatives I know resonate with the phrase "the system," and a lot of liberals resonate with emphasis on the military industrial complex and corporations. Both of which are just facets of this capitalist system, but it creates gentler inroads.
I appreciate your input to the collective discussion, even if I don’t necessarily agree with everything you said.
One slight but not unimpactful potential disagreement is, and Chomsky said this (at least in 2016; maybe he’s tweaked it since), is the impact you mention of 3rd party voting only applies to swing states and states that might be borderline swing states.
But overall I appreciate your informed nuance.
The sleepy dog is in the 5th scale of political consciousness
Although I fundamentally disagree with some of the points stated I greatly appreciated how respectful and well thought through those points were! Great video!!!
Out of curiosity which points do you disagree with?
My brother and I are thinking of voting third party. But I don't think we're accelerationists. We've previously considered the accelerationist position, voting for trump, cuz f*** it. But we're voting third party, rather, on the expectation that the system will endure, as opposed to breaking down. See, we're hoping that we can signal to mainstream parties (see the democrats) that we detest this right-wing swing by embracing the spoiler effect and voting for someone more left than they are. Then, maybe, democrats will work to try and recapture this voting block by appealing to our sensibilities... right? That's the theory anyways. It's the only way we can see of trying to advance our interests in the present electoral system. Different from damage control certainly. Optimistic? Perhaps. But we're tired of being coerced into voting for someone we hate every year.
Yeah, if you believe that the Democrats can be fundamentally moved away from the positions that their corporate funders pay them to hold, and believe that the system as a whole can be salvaged, and the environment, economy, and our communities can all survive another Trump presidency without taking levels of damage that you conscience can't bear, then that makes sense. But it's worth making sure you actually believe each of those things, because if any one of them doesn't feel true to you, then voting third party starts to look a lot less ethical.
Thank you as I came here to say the same thing. It is the only way I know how to help swing the pendulum back the other way. Whether by Dems of an actual 3rd person.
@@WatchfulCoyoteBiden approved almost double the oil drilling of Trump. The capitalist options are like options given to a child. The capitalist/parent is happy with which ever choice.
Thank you.
You said you are standing on the shoulders of giants, so I assume you've done some reading on this topic. Could you provide some reading sources on this topic? Thanks.
Prof. Noam Chomsky's "Necessary Illusions" is a great place to start. It's available in video on here and in print.
This resonated with me deeply, and the four scales expressed here create a useful heuristic device for determining how to engage with friends and family on the "other" political side. This heuristic is also very useful for determining the value of "true" statements expressed about any given political issue.
That said, I find your characterization of third party voters as accelerationists incomplete and (perhaps) unkind, in this election cycle especially.
By your own admission, you live in a state which has instituted ranked choice voting. This allows you to vote your conscience without having to directly grapple with the iterated Prisoner's Dilemma that the two party system creates for the rest of the country. In a similar vein, I live in such a deep blue state that Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to win, releasing me to vote my own conscience in safety. Both you and I are in a privileged position whereupon we can safely vote for a candidate which aligns with our actual values, without any fear that we will inadvertently bring about the worst of all possible worlds by doing so. To your credit, you acknowledge this privilege openly, but I fear that your conclusions are colored by it nonetheless.
When considering, by contrast, the plight of Palestinian and Muslim voters in Michigan, I cannot bring myself to sit in judgment of their refusal to vote for the woman who is actively enabling the genocide of their people, perhaps even their friends and family, either as an "accelerationist" position or just a poor strategic choice.
Similarly, I will not sit in judgment of those who, correctly, observe that the Democratic Party has lurched so far to the right over the past few election cycles precisely because they know that they define the leftward boundary of American politics for all practical purposes. A strong showing by an actually left-leaning third party, especially in swing states, might open up a new leftward flank with which the Democrats are forced to contend. The birth of the Republican Party arose under similar circumstances, and managed to supplant the Whigs that had preceded them.
That said, I completely understand a vote for Kamala Harris as a tactical, anti-fascist vote. My fear is that, given your own acknowledgment that the most powerful folks in the world are operating at either the first (naked self-interest) or the fourth (ideological commitment to a global vision of their choosing) scale of political thought (I might further observe that the the first and fourth scales of political thought manage to form a perfect circle from this vantage point), and further given that Kamala Harris has shown herself to have a lockstep commitment to the interests of those folks, a Harris administration may very well have no meaningful distinction from another Trump administration, apart from the rhetoric that accompanies the policy.
I think we should do that while we can breathe outside!!
I really like this framework and for the most part I agree with your logic, particularly that in this broken system we sometimes have to separate our voting choices from what we actually support (and that you shouldn't be holding your nose, but moving onto the real work), and that the choice should be based on what produces the best (or least worst?) real outcome. Following that logic though, voting for Harris from my position in a winner-take-all red state feels like even more of a performative failure than voting third party.
The one thing that keeps nagging at me is this. If the Green Party obtains more ballot access and federal funding for campaigns by passing the 5% national vote threshold, would it not be the most strategic to vote green in a very solidly blue state like WA? Considering the electoral college determines the outcome, would a couple million popular votes going going green from CA, WA, NY, MA and other strong blue states be an ideal outcome without swaying the election to Trump? I feel like this is something that could be specified, but I haven’t really seen it discussed. Or this could apply to weaker red states to sway more blue, as I know at least some republicans would vote green, possibly more likely in solid blue states as well. Does it require too much organization or risk to overall election results? Or is it too reliant on working within the system for change rather than divesting from it? I can’t come to a solid conclusion. I am not an accelerationist, nor do I want to endanger the most vulnerable populations with my vote, but considering i live in a verrry blue state (WA) it also doesn’t feel like that qualifies. Just not sure what to make of these details
In a solidly blue or solidly red state, voting, 💚💚💚 does not change the electoral college votes, but adds to the 5% threshold
Isn’t “ranked choice voting” an example of reform, working within the system? What about overturning Citizens United, enforcing ethics rules for SCOTUS, carbon credits for individuals (not just corporations)?
34:08 You say, "...be honest with yourself. If you're actually an accelerationist who is willing to trade the lives of the most marginalized people in the world for a chance that the horrors they suffer will awaken the masses and lead to a large enough movement to create meaningful change, own that."
But that's not what I believe voting third party will do. You are projecting YOUR beliefs on third party voter's intentions. You've ignored the statement of the video you included in the related TikTok in which the green party outlines their goals, which aren't even about getting the white house this election cycle. It's disingenuous to ignore their self professed goals. I'm surprised you fell into this trap of assuming third party voters couldn't have genuine (if perhaps delusional) hope that their votes might change the political landscape; for instance, Kamala wins, but it's a close call and the Green Party gets 5% of the vote and federal funding, and the demands are taken more seriously because of a big turnout and recognition of the uncommitted movement's political power. Additionally, how is the consequence of Accelerationism any different than complicit Liberalism (aka reluctant Kamala voters)? Genuine question. Aren't the most disenfranchised and vulnerable harmed in both cases? In an Accelerationist view, wouldn't war or rebellion actually present opportunities for disenfranchised to rise in a reorganization of power? Doesn't voting for Kamala actually prioritize stability and status quo, which keeps the disenfranchised and vulnerable in their existing states? Later 37:25 you say "that's not our fault" regarding environmental catastrophe and then say 37:52 that third party voting is "excuse oneself from the responsibility of action that we all have". So which is it? Your logic is contradictory. Do we have collective responsibility or don't we? If you're a liberal prioritizing your own comfort, own it. You're doing the same condescension you pretend to oppose and honestly I thought I agreed with you until I realized you were just rationalizing voting for a war criminal (just another Tuesday, right?). There is nuance to this but this stream of consciousness thought has many contradictory statements and doesn't actually discuss the goals of third party voters and the uncommitted movement.
Beautiful questions. I don't have the space to address all of them, but one thing I'll mention is this: There's a meaningful difference between fault and responsibility. It seems like you're using or thinking of them interchangeably, and that's dangerous, in relationships and politics. So when I say: "that's not our fault," that statement is not antithetical to it being our responsibility.
Also, it's not support to allow people to walk into traps. In the same way, if I'm acting in a way that has consequences that it seems like I can't see, it's not an act of friendship to say nothing. That's just conflict avoidance. So when I point out that voting third-party is accelerationist, I'm not talking about the motivations for it- I'm speaking about the effects. I framed it the way I did because if someone tells me that I'm walking into a trap, and I still choose to do it, then I'm at least acting with full awareness of the harm I'm about to suffer, regardless of what my initial motivations for choosing that path were. Pointing out the trap isn't questioning my motivations, it's illuminating effects. If, knowing the effects of third party voting amount to accellerationism, you still choose to act that way- then you're choosing an accellerationist path, honestly. I'm not trying to judge that- I have close friends who are accellerationsts. But I will explain why it's not my choice, because I'm trying to make sure everyone's eyes are open.
Hope that sheds a little light on my position.
RE: A Latino man running Proud Boys. Latino does not mean "not white". You can be from a Latin American country and have Spanish, or other European ancestry. I live in Texas, where we use "Hispanic" as a check box for "race" on forms. There's a box for "Hispanic" and a box for "White Hispanic"--because both identities exist. Here's a video of his mother speaking out in a statement--just for reference. I know zero about her racial identity, but she looks like any other blonde white woman you'd see at the mall. Regardless of what her roots are, just looking at her, and hearing her speak--she would be served all the same white privilege of any other white woman on any given day.
th-cam.com/video/7lxKh5asy0M/w-d-xo.html
Magneto is a true accelerationist and the best X-Man. I am #TeamMagento
@@rub702 that’s such a freaking good example. I can’t believe I didn’t think of that. I’m kicking myself.
I think there is some genuine merit in voting third party in deep blue states. The electoral votes for WA state are going all blue, and were a long ways from that changing.
I feel there is validity in getting more funding to go toward third parties via increasing popular vote, when that individual vote will reliably not change the electoral vote count.
And as we both seem to understand, the third oarty does serve a purpose in effecting the natuonal conversation and shifting demands. Third party platforms could also open more people up to higher levels of political thinking.
If i were in a swing state, i would individually be 100% in line with what you say, but as a voter in a deep blue state, I differ individually.
WA voter here, too. I maintain that both red voters and blue voters who want to vote third party have just as much power here. It's nowhere close to a swing state, and the state will go blue, so our votes don't matter here... in that race.
Thankfully, there are a good deal of other races and initiatives that our votes can actually have an impact in. That is to say, however little voting goes to effect change. There is SO much more that needs doing outside of the ballot box (or in our case, the mail-in ballot).
I feel like accelerationism is rarely a position I've seen backed by people who are underprivileged in our system. The only died in the wool accelerationist (who voted for trump in 2016) I've ever met is an Iranian guy born in the US who can live at home with his dad in LA rent free and is extremely stingy but has enough money to fuel a very expensive drug habit and who constantly takes advantage of the people around him. And he says he wants to have trump burn it all down so he can go pick up a rifle and go fight all the people he hates. And that always leaves a bad taste in my mouth because 1) he's not fighting anyone now other than people in his community who care about him and 2) he doesn't really spend the rest of his time building the capacity to fight in a revolutionary war; he spends it getting high and playing video games.
And in my experience, all the politically active folks from marginalized communities tell me how bad the boot of the empire is and they're happy that someone who looks like someone who would wear the empire's boots listens and validates them and wants to do what he can to help get rid of the boot. And they do more political action in a week than the accelerationist does in 4 years.
So I'm really not prepared to trade those people on a roll of the dice that more people will get radicalized when things get really bad especially when radicalization can look like that accelerationist. People who think that all of America's problems can be solved with a cartridge box so long as it gets bad enough that everyone picks it up and it becomes socially acceptable to murder and wound others in the name of the world you want. And all it makes me wonder is: have you tried anything before the last resort? Cuz with my accelerationist I can say for certain he hasn't. Unless playing apex legends and getting high is considered radical political action, he absolutely hasn't. And it makes me wonder what accelerationists have tried to get them to their conclusion.
Yeah, I often experience accellerationism as pretty self-excusing. That said, like most political ideologies, you can find very different expressions of it. A few of the most hardcore marxists I know are acccellerationists, and they're not like the gentleman you know at all- they're deeply politically active in their communities in healthy ways. Doesn't make them right or wrong, but there are different flavors. That said, I obviously agree with you, I don't think it's a good tactic.
When considering the fourth level of consciousness - Is there going to be value in conservative policy makers engaging former democratic participants like Tulsi Gabbard and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.....or even in my mind someone like Bernie Saunders - all who could make significant impact on policy changes that challenge the millitary industrial complex - Gabbard, Big Pharma - Kennedy, and Corporate greed - many forms - Saunders. I consider these options more significant and possible advantageous for citizens to get behind. There are parts of this that are worth discussing.....not just painting with one broad failing brush.
What is your take on the uncommitted movement and saying you won't vote for a candidate for x,y,z reason? Our democratic system is extremely undemocratic but something like that has the ability to twist the arm of a candidate to hear out their constituents. Or is thinking like that just lending more credence to our system than it deserves?
I think it's a great and effective strategy, right up until you enter the ballot box.
I used to consider myself a liberal but after Obama I simply can't look at the system the same way. His whole campaign ran on the notion of change and nothing really did. I don't want to vote for Harris, but I agree that a 2nd Trump presidency would hurt people I know and love. I'm still trying to find a way to help my community, any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
I found this incredibly insightful but have a bit of a thought experiment to consider relating to the point of voting third party. Imagine a couple that are both at the fourth level of political consciousness. They've examined their voting options but conclude two different ways. One's an accelorationist and will vote Trump whilst the other takes your stance and will vote Harris unhappily. However, both are sentimental to third party candidates like De La Cruz. If they vote in opposition to each other, they'll have 'cancelled their votes out' and been as functional as a non-voter. Yet, if they'd both voted third party, although they'd not have made a significant stride towards either accelorationism or harm-reduction, they'll still have made a more than meaningless contribution towards change in the right direction.
I think this kind of thought experiment could mean two things. Either accelorationism and harm-reduction being at odds with one another means that one strategy is much worse than another, and there needs to be more advocating against one or the other; or that voting third party is still viable in some capacity if ultimately either way we're heading in the wrong direction.
Even if this is still an accelorationist idea, would it not make more sense to bring into peoples consciousness the idea of third party options by increading their voter block? An accelorationist wants things to get worse so they can get better later, so why not sow the seeds now instead of later?
You understandably have a bias towards harm reduction, which is good as I too do, but I don't think that accelorationism needs to end with voting for Trump out of spite or the need to prove ones own point. Voting third party in this instance achieves the same outcome but has better long term implications.
@@Danilixo10 so all of this is a conversation about what many call Theories of Change. One way to think about this is just Strategy. Many strategies counteract one another, or if not totally counteract, then at least pull in different enough directions that they render each other much less effective than they would be otherwise.
This is why the central organizing tenet for many people who consider such things is Solidarity. Don’t cross picket lines is a good example of this. This is why Unions are so central to meaningful change- they’re a context for everyone to get on the same page about strategy, Theories of Change, and pull in the same direction efficiently.
I would love a guide, even if it needs to be reductive and simplified, on how we can enact actual change in a system where voting’s not really a productive option. I understand concepts like community building and organizing but it’s so hard to know where to start and how to know if you’re actually on the right path. I can actively see how austerity and privatization is corroding the safety nets my community used to have and it makes me feel so incredibly powerless. I try to help out in my community. I could to more but it’s a start. But that doesn’t change the fact that my country is sponsoring heinous acts around the world in order to line the pockets of the ruling class.
Re: where to start in organizing >
I’ve joined lots of different groups over the years. I finally exited the liberal purgatory phase when I began associating with groups that were actively anti-colonial/anti-imperialist. This might look like: Land Back, Free Palestine, or local mutual aid groups focused on housing, substance harm reduction, etc. Hope this gives you a jumping off point. I know rallies don’t always feel productive, but they’re a great way to meet likeminded folks if you’re attending specific ones.
I feel like I still get lost trying to reach conservatives I know through anti corporate conversation as many of them seem to always find their way back to 'trickle down' and a need for big business and rich people otherwise 'who would give poor people jobs and pay them'. Then it always gets detailed to other issues...
Not sure if you bring this up later (i am 40 min in) but i feel like local elections are completely overlooked in the Discourse (tm).
I am German so maybe this is just not as big a deal in America, and as an inhabitant of earth the presidential election is important to me, but i think the material conditions of USians can be much improved with local elections. States rights is a dog whistle yes, but couldn't that also be used for good? If you can't stomach voting for Kamala, which I whole heartedly understand (voting in Germany next year, knowing that basically all parties are pro is not real is going to be very similar), focus on your local politics. And yes that's still within the system and not nearly enough (the Chomsky paraphrase also applies to local government) but it will make a difference, materially. I was organised in a local chapter of the left party in my state as a teen and you very quickly realize how many of the folks in politics are just people. People you can talk to. And this doesn't replace systemic change, but it can give other people the mental capacity to become active too. People speak fondly of the programs that helped them in times of need, of mutual aid groups that made a difference.
One of my issues with accelerationism is that it robs everyone most affected of the agency to inform themselves and become active. If i am working 2 jobs, still not making ends meet, in debt, homeless that's not really the time to read theory for a lot of people. Some people do, some people go to prison and get educated, but I am guessing this is not the norm. And if the situation gets so dire no one has the energy to think until every thing collapses we would all need burnout retreats before we can rebuild. And that's not feasible in my opinion
The best thing about living in Alabama is that I can vote guilt free for Jill Stein.
Same with Vermont, but I'm personally happier to vote for PSL and De la Cruz
Countrywide all votes for Stein will count towards the 5% threshold for permanent ballot status, saving months of work and expense, and providing multimillion dollar public funding
can u recommend a few good books for each level of consciousness and a few just good ones that just help understand all of this i would much appreciate that. i prefer as large a list as u can muster but again ill appreciate any help. thank you
You spoke to the intersectionality of patriarchy, capitalism, white supremacy, etc., and make the point that these are all actually the same thing. I have begun referring to this ‘thing’ as dominator culture, a term coined by Riane Eisler and expounded upon by bell hooks. By defining the concept my hope is that it gives people a tangible term to search and explore. However, the results of an internet search of this term are dominated by Terrence McKenna’s more extreme mysticism, which, in my experience, tends to deter people from wanting to go deeper. Is there a term that you use, and/or do you think there is value in advocating for the use of the term dominator culture to name that intersectionality?
@@stevenbilzing5250 I don’t know. This is something that I saw hooks struggle with as well, because names matter, and it’s hard. She often just named many facets, like: “Capitalist patriarchal white supremacy.” Precise, but clunky, as she obviously knew. When I track it, it feels like the common denominator is dehumanization. It’s the dehumanization that leads to the exploitation, the domination, etc. But that’s a long compound word that doesn’t translate well to a name, like “dehumanizing culture” isn’t catchy, doesn’t roll off the tongue. So I don’t know.
This is exactly the information I needed to hear. Ive been struggling so much with the idea of voting for Kamala. I believe I was going down the path of accelerationism and I have much to think about still.
What do you think of the strategy of outwardly telling your friends/family (who are level 1-3) that you will not be voting for her (and the reasons why) even if you are? Does that accomplish anything?
Thanks
As a screenwriter myself I’m curious, do you think hollywood is or will ever be an effective medium to create any modicum of change?
I think myth and story are among the most powerful tools for shaping societies. The problem is that the Pentagon already knows that, this is why they have the unholy alliance they do with hollywood. So I think the problem is that hollywood is SUCH an amazing medium to create change, and it's already been hijacked and is currently in complete service to the system that we need to change. That's not an argument against writing liberatory stories- we need those desperately. We need counterpoints to the overwhelming sea of propaganda that is shoved down our throats daily, dressed as crime dramas and superhero films. Just pointing out that it's an uphill battle, we're not starting from neutral ground around mythology.
@@WatchfulCoyote Just gotta keep finding a way to get the word out. Through pamphlet or youtube short lol keep fighting the good fight brother
Is the full text of this video available? Thank you.
@@jaeyslas9839 it is, here: healthecycle.com/2024/09/26/the-four-scales-of-political-thought/
A respectfully conveyed and unique perspective. Thank you for the opportunity to challenge and refine my own views. If you have any sources for the Diddy/Epstein/Trump connection I’d appreciate them for my own research. Thanks!
I love this framework! I do have a contention with your view of Trumps current position, however. With people like RFK, Vivek, Tulsi, Tucker etc. surrounding Trump this time, and the fact that many more people have woken up to the corporate capture of our government - can you admit that he is much better equipped to actually be the anti-establishment candidate this time around? The fact that he has admitted fault in many of the people he surrounded himself with during his presidency, shows that he may be self aware and ready to do it better this time. (I fully acknowledge that this proposition goes against his inherent selfish and hard headed character. Lol, but it’s still possible)
When considering questions that I already have an opinion on, I sometimes find it helpful to put it in a wholly different context that I have the opposite opinion about. Like imagine that Biden hadn't dropped out, but had made some cabinet changes. Then imagine someone saying: "Don't you think he's much better equipped to stand up for the people of the United States now?" How would you respond?
@@WatchfulCoyote I can appreciate the exercise. It makes me see my possible bias on both sides when thinking about it that way. When it comes to Biden, it would take a huge paradigm shift on his behalf and VERY different cabinet appointees, for me to believe any real “4th level of thinking” changes would come from that. I know there are people who think that exact same thing about Trump, so how do we reconcile that? Can both viewpoints be true? For me the difference is that Trump has started to surround himself with people who are openly calling out the uniparty corruption and structural issues in our government, while Biden has been a part of that problem for most of his political career.
I also want to admit that my largest apprehension that's holding me back from taking RFK's endorsement to heart and actually voting for Trump, is the fear that Trump won't actually be the anti-establishment candidate that's he's setting himself up to be. I am very aware that in large part, this is what happened during his first time in office and could very well happen again.
Hi I'm not sure if you respond or not but I had some takeaways from the video that I wanted to engage in a dialogue about. One of the things mentioned is Chomsky's picking against an objectively evil candidate as a break from the work we need to be doing didn't resonate too much with me. By how you've explained things in the video, doesn't the "break vote" even as a revolutionary circle back to the third scale voting practice of maintaining stability for the time being?
Some other things I thought of was the break from your work as you phrased it. From what I've seen of you (tiktok and youtube) you seem to be doing exceptional work in guiding people towards the cause while also trying to instill values of healthy masculinity to the youth. Unfortunately the leftist movement in the states is still almost non existent and even in the spaces that do exist there's so much infighting its hard to see the work of those spaces as meaningful other than platforming our collective anti-capitalist stance. So most of the time, your strategy of vote for the lesser evil and then keep the work up until the evil doesn't have the means to oppress doesn't really apply to well here because the actual work is being done by a fairly small group of individuals like yourself while enabling third scale voters to think they're voting on a fourth scale understanding without taking on the moral responsibility it comes with voting for an objectively evil candidate like Kamala, even if she's apparently just a little less evil than Trump. My primary concern being the complacency that comes with voting for liberal governments. As you mentioned on your tiktok, voting blue did absolutely nothing this term in terms of things like Roe V. Wade, the genocide of the Palestinian people, government approved anti-union crackdowns, etc. A liberal government creates a far more complacent population than a conservative government does.
Another factor to consider in my opinion is also how comfortable the republicans have gotten to severely contradictory positions and statements. Kamala is very clear on her support for the Israeli occupation. So is Trump, but him and his party are currently perceived as more Pro-Palestine than the democrats by non fourth scale voters (especially in Arab and Muslim communities) because the genocide started and perpetuated under DNC leadership and American conservatives will excuse Trump for anything. I personally do not think the right wing is organized enough to establish a fascist government outright in one term but another blue term will solidify this stance of the general populace who might not be super informed. I am hyper fixating on the genocide because I feel like regardless of its horrors, it disillusioned a good chunk of liberals. If the Trump administration takes over and continues it (which I am sure they will), it will work to disillusion conservative POC voters at the minimum. Conservative sentiments are at an all time high in older brown (Arab, South Asian, Latin) communities because their goldfish memory makes them think the only things that are bombing people that look like them are Netanyahu and Biden, not Zionism, Imperialism and Capitalism.
I guess I am an accelerationist this election because I think the general public in the US need to be disillusioned urgently. They need to learn that instead of saying both sides and calling it a day, they have to recognize the underlying oppression that comes default with capitalism and the both parties in the US represent the same things, corporate interest and capitalism. This would not come with another blue term. I live in Canada so I am a direct witness on what North American liberalism does. It never protects the vulnerable but successfully moves the general sentiment towards conservatism. So, trying to protect the most vulnerable in the society by voting lesser evil has worsened the conditions of the most vulnerable to the point of no return. Homeless people would still be homeless under Kamala and that is definitely not protecting the most vulnerable at the slightest. Sure Trump might put them in a camp or worse but the problem with liberal governments is since things stay the same people forget how horrible this "same" is. Vulnerable families are victims of food insecurity, lack of access to healthcare and so much more and even though we have almost normalized how these words affect us, these are absolutely horrible things happening to our fellow human beings RIGHT NOW. Which vulnerable community will be better off under blue? Not homeless people, not marginal communities (LGBTQ+, POC, etc.), not even women (Roe V. Wade). I am keeping this strictly local because the argument made for protecting the most vulnerable can never apply to the most vulnerable in other countries like again, Palestinians. They are already being erased from the planet under the "lesser evil". How would voting blue protect the most vulnerable people in the world or in US right now? I am not coming from a place of hostility and I absolutely hate leftist infighting but man I despise complacency.
TLDR: I can't vote in the states but if I did, I would definitely vote for Trump, the "higher evil" and then dip my entire body in hand sanitizer for a week.
What a thoughtful and useful framework for understanding different political perspectives within my own little social group! Thank you for making this. I'm currently about 20 minutes in, and I would love to see citations about certain claims made in the video, if the creator or anyone in the comments can help me out:
- Trump being involved in human trafficking (other than his association with Epstein, which I understand is more than enough evidence in many folks' minds).
- Kamala being further to the right on corporate regulation and foreign policy than George W. Bush. Where is this coming from? The Bush era was globally and nationally transformative in those two areas.
- Obama siccing dogs on indigenous people. I recall when this happened amid the Dakota Access pipeline protests, but I thought it was a private security agency. How was Obama involved? All I remember is him delaying the pipelines as a lame duck and Trump issuing the permits immediately on taking office.
The first one's easy, if I remember I'll put some resources together on the other two, but because the Kamala/Bush question is comparative, it requires more sourcing than I have time for at the moment. Hope this helps, though!
www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/14/teen-models-powerful-men-when-donald-trump-hosted-look-of-the-year
That article is a bit outdated, but paints a picture. If you want the recent updates, this video is a very tidy summary that paints a much more accurate and up-to-date image of what he was doing and why. www.tiktok.com/t/ZTFPWeR1K/
I agree with a lot of what you said in your video and regardless I want to thank you for taking the time to make this video but I definitely disagree with some of the points made. First, I understand the mainstream accelerationist perspective but I could argue that it’s accelerationist to elect Harris so that society can see a woman of color commit all sorts of war crimes and atrocities to finally break from identity politics and the false premise of lesser evils and get to organizing. Second, to tell third party voters they’re all accelerationist is simply not true and telling them to vote for Trump instead is not even materially relevant to what countless third party voters are trying to build. You understand that Claudia De la Cruz is a good candidate and has a solid policy platform, voting for that, ESPECIALLY in solid blue states is what organized and strategic voting looks like and should have been talked about just how you referenced your ability to vote differently under ranked choice in Maine. Voter turnout for third party has real material benefits in highlighting popular policy positions, even going further to demand cabinet positions, at some point to get a third party that has leverage on a relevant scale we have to struggle in establishing that and isn’t only relevant when there’s a clear path to victory. Third, it sounds like a self serving western liberal perspective to romanticize and talk about a vote being qualitatively different if it comes the fourth level of consciousness for Kamala vs third level of consciousness for her, a vote is a vote. Obviously, I agree with the premise of moving past that to recognize that people on the fourth level recognize the importance of organizing to reclaim our soul and consciousness after voting Kamala.
Last thing I want to mention is that for your references to adrienne marie brown and Stacy Abrams, they could have leveraged their voices for over a year to hold Kamala accountable but they did not. You made a comment saying, “Getting the empire to put up a pride flag instead of structurally opposing it, they’re actually supporting the empire”. adrienne maree brown is so deep into celebrity culture and worship of people like Beyoncé which to understand you know has to do with internalized white supremacy and capitalism. I believe they’re important individuals who have contributed a great deal but we can name countless radicals that disagree with how they’re showing up and relating to the fourth level of consciousness, put their bodies on the line for the collective. Thanks again for the video and I appreciate how you humanize people across the spectrum, since most of us are working class and have more in common than we think. Would love to hear what you think about my comments.
Great vid! Though i do want to point out to anyone watching that at 44:06 you can see the prime encapsulation of leftist thought which i believe is not directly & accurately articylated in the video. Rightly or wrongly, accusing the founders of plagiarizing haudenosaunee politics does the following: 1) aligns with the defeated and profiled-as inferior while aggrandizing their worth 2) assumes a value of capitalist society - intellectual property 3) accuses mainstream capitalist society of violating its own virtue 4) downplays, in this case leaves out, discussion of the victim-profiled group's own transgressions against the value held (intellectual property). It is a classic leftist logical pathway stemming from feelings of & sympathies for the weak, overcome, and defeated. A valid one bc human empathy (duh), but one with the tradeoff of often losing when it comes to material confrontation with the industrial systems. Something advocated against in the section on strategic thinking as a rebel group.
Seriously, i love this video it is intelligently constructed, written, and i like the critiques of conservative, fascist, liberal, accelerationist, and leftist ideologies. I just noticed this as a super concise expression of a reiterated motif from lefty types. Keep up the good work 👍
I get the third three points, and especially the one about assuming the value of a capitalist society is a great critique, but I'm a little confused by what you mean of the first one, especially the phrase: "aggrandizing their worth." The Haudenosaunee Confederacy held for two millennia, it's arguably one of the single most successful human governance models in the entire history of our species, on par with the Roman Empire, except without all the internal inequity and violence. Given that, referring to it in a celebratory way feels accurate to me- but to you it seems aggrandizing? Or am I misinterpreting?
@WatchfulCoyote you're getting it, but a critical part is the 4th pt that in criticizing the mainstream society on grounds of some virtue, the absence or disrespect of that virtue in other societies is downplayed or omitted. That reveals something about the true motivations. For example, it's common among leftist types to allege (mostly correctly) that western society is for example patriarchal and has a blood & soil nationalism. Yet very uncommon is any highlighting of these virtues in groups who the lefty identifies with the problems of such as the current palestinian nationalist movement. In the case here w the haudenosaunee, you claim them to have lasted 2k yrs. I'll assume there's information to base that on, but AFAIK the general historical consensus is that it was formed by Hiawatha et al in the late 1400s. So here it seems to me like you've exaggerated the longevity of that confederacy in order to give it higher status than it has already rightfully earned by virtue of its principles & it being a successful multinational union. Since the criticism is very selectively leveled, it indicates that the critic doesn't so much have a problem with patriarchy/blood & soil nationalism/imperialism/environmental destruction/etc etc, rather they have a problem with who's doing it and hence want to highlight apparent hypocrisies.
Looping into a broader point with this is that while the thinking takes the form of a left wing attack, it is a kind of conservative argument at its core since it presents an idealized image of the past that the implicitly degenerate present has deviated from. And this imo fails for the same most conservative thinking does: it is the way it is bc of the way it was, so making things more the way they were brings us back to where we are.
This framework is very insightful and obviously well studied. I’m considering sending this to my very conservative family members to give them a new perspective. However, I am caught up on the voting for Kamala as the “break” and going back and doing the work of destroying the systems that uphold her. I have seen Palestinians in deep deep distress over the prospect of Americans voting for Kamala, their genocider. They will be one of the marginalized communities that will be thrown under the bus under a Harris administration, if we’re voting against accelerationism. I firmly believe that Palestinian resistance and the fall of Israel will be a major liberatory catalyst to free us all, for many reasons, but mostly given the connection between US empire and Israel. So how do you rectify that? I’m not sure I can step over all the bodies of Palestinians, who right now are actively being harmed, on my way to vote for Kamala. Would love any insights on this.
Remember remember the 5th of November
Have your views changed after the Appalachian disaster ?
Nice lorax reference.
One must be able to vote third party, knowing there is no path to victory, believing that their vote sends a message to the adjacent party that they want it to change. Perhaps that effect is not worth the risk this election though
We are not sending our message to the system, but to reticent compatriots. We 💚💚💚want to break the uniparty and the empire. Red vs Blue differences are in rhetoric alone. Both are approved by the 1%er capitalists
I try to be bias towards free will, principles before profit, leaving it better than it was found, and serving others before yourself.
I don't believe there are two or more parties. I believe people are given an illusion of choice between two evils.
It's sad to see people overlook horrendous acts committed by their side just because they think the ends justify the means.
Every voter is put in morally compromising positions every single election. My body, my choice is a concept of free will I support. Despite rhetoric, both sides want to make health and wellness decisions for you. Then they can write more bills.
The system was designed to concentrate the authority of many in to the hands of a few. Our government, allegedly instituted for the well-being of all, has far surpassed the grievances noted in the Declaration of Independence.
The Bill of Rights were amendments, after thoughts used as leverage. The delegates codefied slavery. The media presented Natives as barbarians so the Indian Removal act would be supported.
Countless atrocities against innocent women and children carried out across multiple presidents and various political parties.
For some reason, we keep casting votes of confidence for con artists. Lawyers who make up laws that keep lawyers in business. Ignorance of the law is no excuse yet it's incomprehensible to teach in public school.
I think we need to reverse the flow of funding so it flows from the counties up. Individuals need more control over the decisions that impact our moral positions. We need the ability to hold public officials accountable.
We need a cap on wealth so that currency continues flowing through the economy. Stockpiling is disruptive to free enterprise. No one should have enough resources to buy a politician or country.
Our system may be the best on the planet, but the design is flawed. Self serving people are happy exploiting those flaws and towing the line to keep the system as it is.
Any politician not talking about the expiration date of this empire is trying to maintain a corrupt system of control.
You lost me on Biden breaking the Railway Strike caused the East Palestine derailment. That derailment would have happened regardless of the outcome of the strike. I believe you know there are many things that cause events like this, and these many reasons normally point to a systems error and not a political decision. This oversimplification to justify your point seems out of place in a long form video.
@@neil5652 even in long form, there’s things I condense, and it’s tricky. Would you agree with the statement: “The rail workers strike was partially driven by the Union’s concern about degrading infrastructure and crashing safety standards.” ?
@@WatchfulCoyoteI can agree with that though I wouldn't say "Crashing" numerically railroads are safer than they have ever been. And your larger point I also agree with. The race to the bottom which the rail industry calls "Precision Schedule Railroading" is the heavier contribution to that derailment. I'd also say the USs reliance on trucks is directly pressuring railroads to act in this way.
He’s good. Really good, philosophically speaking. But ultimately, regarding how to move forward, he missed the boat big-time. It’s not just ranked-choice Maine residents who should vote 3rd party, it’s every person who values human rights and lives in a deep blue or deep red state. Maybe he doesn’t know that if/when a 3rd party reaches 5% of the popular vote, they will in the future have automatic ballot placement and federal funding and become viable. I don’t blame him, I just learned this political reality in 2024. We aren’t taught much bout how the system works in school and the two dominant parties actively suppress the information. Moral of the story, in any states other than swing-states (Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, Arizona, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Georgia, maybe a few others if you are determined to play it safe) voting for Kamala is fear-motivated, counter-productive, and wasteful. Vote Green. Help build a real movement for people & planet. The answer is to transform the system, not “totally tear it down” as he says a few times. That’s some 15 year-old anarchist wet dream nonsense. Antifa, yes. Green Party, also yes. ✅
While I have no training in it, I do like to keep an eye on history. In 1992, Perot won 19% of the popular vote. It did not break the duopoly. In fact, it seems to have achieved exactly noting, from where I sit. I, for one, try not to make the same mistake more than once. Or at least as few times as it takes me to see a pattern.
To the other point, the idea that systems of power are eternal and beyond any attempt to tear down, I just like to look at the other empires of history. What changed them? Did Rome use third-party voting to escape the crushing grip of the emperors? Is there any, like literally *any* example of tyrannical empires changing in any way *other* than being torn down, one way or another?
Even a cursory glance at history reveals the oft-repeated idea that empires can never be threatened, can never be torn down, as complete and utter nonsense. Once we see that, then it becomes clear that such a belief, rather than being the grounded and reality-based perspective that it's presented as, is a deeply internalized form of self-defeating, disempowering propaganda. No matter how many times people say things like: "That's some 15 year-old anarchist wet dream nonsense," history seems to think that it is the only way to topple systems of tyranny.
When this is brought up, it's often met with a litany of details, like the fact that Rome spread it's self so thin, and the emergent inequity drove a civil unrest that created fertile ground for change. Somehow people manage to make these points while ignoring the glaring fact that the US empire is in *precisely* the same position today. It's breathtaking, really.
Anyway, remember the words of Ursula LeGuin: "We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings."
You are very well written and thank you for your thoughts. They largely resonate with me, to a point, and I would love further discussion since my ballot sits waiting for marks. I think you oversimply the 4th level position of voting 3rd party. You collapse the choice of someone attempting to operate at the 4th level between accelerationism and activism, and thus demand that someone who does not vote Harris-Waltz "be honest enough" to vote Trump instead. Here, I think, you are incorrect. In my armature opinion, as a over-idealistic supporter of RCV and as a scientist, I take issue with any demand for strategic voting.
Consider your statement that "refusing to vote" or a "protest vote" is ineffective, to the point that the system benefits from such action. This may be true (and may be not) but by the same logic is absolutely true of a strategic vote. Sadly though, as you have very well outlined, a voter operating from the 3rd and a voter operating from the 4th level who chooses to vote Democrat has become, from a statistical view, indistinguishable from each other. To me this is abhorrent, as future responses will be based on information from past actions, and if the only information we can discern from a vote is an implicit mandate to govern of the winner, we repeat the same cycles.
A vote for a 3rd party or strategically withholding ones vote, need not explicitly be placing "the most marginalized in harms way on a gamble for a better world" but simply be a method of letting your sincere preference be recorded, and this information does have value. Despite what we espouse, this country's generally abysmal voter turnout and falling position in the word democracy index, are part of sincerely not voting for candidates who are entirely not ideologically aligned and sincerely voting for 3rd parties (and talking about them) is what gives RCV movements such strength. A rational 4th level non accelerationist may simply not vote for Harris and Waltz because that vote undermines their demand for a better democracy.
I am truly jealous that you can express both support for your ideal candidate and not empower someone you dislike. So please do not disparage the choices of those with a less enlightened ballot. Hopefully someday before we die of heatstroke, extreme weather, or WW3 we might all be so lucky to have such choices.
Ranked choice voting, imho, a political reform but doesn’t address the problem of “the system.” Maybe FB marketplace and thrift store shopping is the easiest way for individuals to bring down the system. And becoming vegan😂
A lot of what you say is compelling, but I’m not convinced when you say I might as well vote for Trump to be honest with myself? Not compelling. This only makes me want to vote for neither even more.
I think saying there is any difference between Harris and Trump is like saying if a parent asks a child whether they want a red or blue shirt , that there is a difference. The capitalist options have both been approved by the 1%er capitalists.
im not an accelerationist. im not a politician or an activist. i am a noone. but i am a person and I'm not going to vote for a genocide. I'm sorry my ethical and intellectual capacity is so limited but I am at my limit.
I’m bothered by his assertion that my vote isn’t actually who I’m voting for, while in the same video saying that it isn’t actually fascism here yet?
Yes, watchful coyote admits that Harris and Trump are virtually the same policies with different rhetoric. But then says voting for Harris is harm reduction. Illogical.
You cite "research" that "all multi-millionaires are narcissistic and psychopaths," and this is provably false, regardless of what research you might be citing. In proof, I myself am a multimillionaire and am neither of those things. Nor are those who I associate with or choose to do business with. Be more careful with your rhetoric, please.
If anyone's curious, this Psychology Today article cites a dozen studies on this trend.
www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/dangerous-ideas/201910/psychology-s-dark-triad-and-the-billionaire-class
You’re not a multimillionaire. They don’t have all the time in the world to complain on a random man’s TH-cam channel unless you won the lotto to get your money if you even have it as you claim😂
@@shinysphinx8849 shhh... if you meme too loudly Elon Musk may appear.
The is an interesting take. I mean this with respect. His point of view is clearly from a white privileged position. It doesn’t account for race and marginalized groups and how that impacts your consciousness. It doesn’t put any value in skin in the game. It’s easy to talk about sacrifice if you aren’t being sacrificed. You are saying how you have greater alignment with Jan 6 m, but as a Black person I see that but also see that they were actively trying to suppress votes of Blacks and if we overthrow corporate overlords they might still have issue with me.
I've come to associate appeals to skin in the game with arguments for capitalism (or at least for market-based economics), but other than that I see the same things in the interesting take above. His willingness to take "it's really CRONY capitalism you're against" conservatism at face value, as opposition to corporations, is hilarious.
Im a black woman and I agree with his take fully
Respectfully this is inconsistent and not particularly insightful. It comes off just as condescending as what you describe. By using your vote to support democrats, you are using your vote to support a genocide that would not be possible without the explicit or implicit approval of the American public. This is an American genocide rooted in American racism. Either the set of policies you vote for matters of it doesn’t. All this talk of levels of consciousness twisting yourself into a pretzel to justify voting to maintain a racist status quo that is clearly indefensible. I say this as someone who has enjoyed some of your content.
I second that. After admitting that there's no light between Harris and Trump, to then go on to say that Harris is harm reduction is faulty logic
Came from TikTok, a vote for Stein is the only way to unravel this straight jacket of political woe.
Harris won’t change, ergo I’m hoping Stein gets a say.
You are finally seeing the reality that dividing the vote elects Trump. Everyone suffers. All we face is whether we protest Harris now or Trump later.
That’s the choice before us. Own that.
you might listen to the video, as it seems you have not